And no, this post isn’t going to be about math.  So come back here and quit running in terror.  The screaming is disturbing the neighbors.

Things have gotten rolling full speed at the day job, the offspring has gotten back into the swing of things, and I’m trying to juggle numerous (figurative) flaming chainsaws.

So while trying to kill time between interruptions at work this afternoon (there was too much going on to be able to shut the door and work on tasks that require extended concentration), I looked at the top posts for this blog.

It was rather interesting.  I didn’t compare or combine the numbers from when I was on Blogger, just looked at things since I set up my own domain.  I didn’t look at the other blogs, only Adventures Fantastic.  I ignored the most viewed page, which is the homepage, and looked at only individual posts, wherein a pattern quickly emerged.

I looked at the top 26 posts.  The posts about me and about the blog were in there, as was an obituary.  There was one end of year review (2013) and two reviews of books published since I began blogging.  There was also the review of the first issue of the new Weirdbook, which I will consider pulp related since it deals with something that has a history.

The top two posts dealt with some type of controversy; five total posts in the top 26 dealt with controversy.  When I say controversy, I’m talking about something where someone was offended by something someone else liked or had tried to act as a gatekeeper or censor in some fashion, such as trying to get everyone not to read books by men for a year.  Or to put it another way, I was reacting against PC thought control in some form.  Or to put it another way, I reacted when I felt that my pulp sensibilities were under attack.

There were seven posts about Robert E. Howard.  Some were reviews of his work, some were reports of Howard Days, but all dealt with Howard in some way.  There were six that dealt with pulps in general, mainly Leigh Brackett or Margaret Brundage.  And one was a review of a classic novel from the early 60s.

What have I learned from this entirely unscientific glance at my stats?  That my readership for pulp related posts is much higher than most reviews of current books and magazines.  I’m  okay with that.  I’m trying to build a community of liked-minded folks who share a passion for fantasy, pulp, science fiction, and historical adventure.  Not everyone likes all of those things, so I’ve got multiple blogs.  Real Life is hindering my reading and blogging some, so I need to narrow my focus during this season.  If that means the ratio of pulp to contemporary shifts to the pulp side, so be it.

Am I saying that I’ll not be reviewing current works or not reading science fiction or noir?  Not at all.  Just that when I have to make a choice, I’ll tend towards the pulpier side of things.  I’ll probably do more posts that are pulp related but not reviews.  I’d like to post two or three times a week, if possible.  I won’t be able to read enough to do that many reviews, so I’m going to need to find other content.

So if there seems to be a shift in emphasis here, you know why.